Clinical and Healthcare Burden of Multiple Recurrences of<i>Clostridium difficile</i>Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is associated with a high risk of recurrence (rCDI). Few studies have focused on multiple recurrences. To evaluate the potential of novel treatments targeting recurrence, we assessed the burden and severity of rCDI. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort of adults diagnosed with CDI in a hospital in Sherbrooke, Canada (1998-2013). An rCDI episode was defined by the reappearance of diarrhea leading to a treatment, with or without a positive toxin assay, within 14-60 days after the previous episode. RESULTS: We included 1527 patients. The probability of developing a first rCDI was 25% (354/1418); a second, 38% (128/334); a third, 29% (35/121); and a fourth or more, 27% (9/33). Two or more rCDIs were observed in 9% (128/1389) of patients. The risk of a first recurrence fluctuated over time, but there was no such variation for second or further recurrences. The proportion of severe cases decreased (47% for initial episodes, 31% for first recurrences, 25% for second, 17% for third), as did the risk of complicated CDI (5.8% to 2.8%). The severity and risk of complications of first recurrences decreased over time, while oral vancomycin was used more systemically. A hospital admission was needed for 34% (148/434) of recurrences. CONCLUSIONS: This study documented the clinical and healthcare burden of rCDI: 34% of patients with rCDI needed admission, 28% developed severe CDI, and 4% developed a complication. Secular changes in the severity of recurrences could reflect variations in the predominant strain, or better management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".